> I think Erik and you should be permitted to set the PUBLISH keyword with > one review, so you could be more productive and increase your experience > by learning from mistakes, too. Well, I would certainly welcome that :-) And I'm sure Erik would too. > There's one single de-motivating thing and > that is if new reviewers seem to wait endlessly for a second review. That's true. The REVIEWED keyword is a step in the right direction though > But don't forget that a big portion of the queue has a very special target > group (e.g. lots of educational programming languages). These packages are > very unlikely to be reviewed by someone who has no interest in them. And > in particular not, if they don't even build flawlessly, because such > package requests result in a lot of work. The best thing would clearly to have categories in the QA queue. But I remember finding a package I liked in the queue, looking closely at it, and discovering afterwards that a previous QA'er had found mistakes in it, and the maintainer had not updated the package yet. I'm just trying to come up with a solution to this case. This is certainly not as useful as categories, but requires less architectural changes at the same time ;) Aurélien -- http://gauret.free.fr ~~~~ Jabber : gauret@xxxxxxxxxxxxx "Je suis fasciné par l'air. Si on enlevait l'air du ciel, tous les oiseaux tomberaient par terre... Et les avions aussi..." -- Jean-Claude Vandamme
